NCT07208903

Brief Summary

The systematic inclusion of spinal muscular atrophy (SMA) in France's neonatal genetic screening (NGS) program, scheduled for September 2025, represents a major milestone in public health. While this screening enables early detection and therapeutic intervention before symptom onset, it also raises psychological and ethical challenges that remain underexplored-particularly during the highly sensitive postpartum period. Currently, data on parental experiences following a positive SMA NGS result are scarce, fragmented, and largely derived from North American studies or from metabolic screening contexts. Early publications highlight high levels of parental anxiety, dissatisfaction with the quality of result disclosure, and difficulties in processing complex medical information in a short, emotionally charged timeframe. These findings underscore the need for a deeper understanding of the subjective processes at play in this situation. The PSYSMA project is designed as an ancillary study to the DEPISMA trial. Its aim is to retrospectively explore parents' lived experiences, their psychosocial support needs, and the impact of NGS on family dynamics and the parent-child relationship. Special attention is given to cases with uncertain results (e.g., ≥4 SMN2 copies without treatment) and false negatives, which remain poorly documented but may trigger unique forms of parental anxiety or adaptation. This research is justified by two main needs:

  • to guide public health policy toward integrating psychological support from the earliest stages of screening, in line with French National Health Authority (HAS) recommendations;
  • to generate new knowledge transferable to other genetic diseases that may be included in future neonatal screening programs. The overarching goal is to retrospectively investigate the psychological experience of parents confronted with a positive or false-negative SMA NGS result, in order to analyze its subjective, emotional, and relational effects, as well as related needs for psychological support. Study objectives :
  • Compare parental experiences according to the nature of the result (with or without treatment indication).
  • Identify psychosocial support needs, including for siblings.
  • Assess anxiety, depression, and post-traumatic symptoms associated with NGS.
  • Explore the broader impact on family functioning, particularly in relation to genetic counseling and communication within the extended family.

Trial Health

65
Monitor

Trial Health Score

Automated assessment based on enrollment pace, timeline, and geographic reach

Enrollment
36

participants targeted

Target at P25-P50 for all trials

Timeline
5mo left

Started Oct 2025

Shorter than P25 for all trials

Status
not yet recruiting

Health score is calculated from publicly available data and should be used for screening purposes only.

Trial Relationships

Click on a node to explore related trials.

Study Timeline

Key milestones and dates

Study Progress55%
Oct 2025Oct 2026

First Submitted

Initial submission to the registry

September 23, 2025

Completed
13 days until next milestone

First Posted

Study publicly available on registry

October 6, 2025

Completed
14 days until next milestone

Study Start

First participant enrolled

October 20, 2025

Completed
1 year until next milestone

Primary Completion

Last participant's last visit for primary outcome

October 20, 2026

Expected
Same day until next milestone

Study Completion

Last participant's last visit for all outcomes

October 20, 2026

Last Updated

October 6, 2025

Status Verified

October 1, 2025

Enrollment Period

1 year

First QC Date

September 23, 2025

Last Update Submit

October 2, 2025

Conditions

Outcome Measures

Primary Outcomes (3)

  • Quantitative: Content of the questionnaires completed at the inclusion visit

    Scores on the IES-R scale (Impact of Event Scale) for post-traumatic stress. Minimum value: 0 (if the person selects "not at all" for all 22 items). Maximum value: 88 (if the person selects "extremely" for all 22 items). Interpretation: Higher scores reflect worse outcomes, meaning more severe post-traumatic stress symptoms (intrusion, avoidance, hyperarousal).

    Month 4, plus or minus 2 months

  • Qualitative: Content of interviews/focus groups at the follow-up visit regarding

    Emotional reactions to the announcement Representations of the illness and its treatment Impact on the parent-child relationship Experience of the screening process and the perception of support received

    Month 4, plus or minus 2 months

  • Quantitative: Content of the questionnaires completed at the inclusion visit

    Scores on the HADS scale (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale) for anxiety symptoms. Structure: 14 items total, split into two subscales: * HADS-A (Anxiety) - 7 items * HADS-D (Depression) - 7 items Minimum value: 0 (no symptoms). Maximum value: 21 per subscale (if all items scored at the maximum of 3). but 42 total if both subscales are summed. Interpretation: Higher scores reflect a worse outcome, meaning greater anxiety and/or depressive symptom severity.

    Month 4, plus or minus 2 months

Study Arms (3)

Treated positive screening group

Parents of children with a positive neonatal genetic screening result who received treatment (\<4 SMN2 copies)

Behavioral: focus group discussions

Untreated positive screening group

Parents of children with a positive neonatal genetic screening result who did not receive treatment (≥4 SMN2 copies)

Behavioral: focus group discussions

False-negative screening group

Parents of children with a false-negative neonatal genetic screening result (diagnosed secondarily)

Behavioral: Interview with the psychologist

Interventions

These sessions will address: * emotional reactions to the disclosure of the result * perceptions and representations of the disease and its treatment * the impact on the parent-child relationship * the lived experience of neonatal screening and the perception of the support provided

Treated positive screening groupUntreated positive screening group

These sessions will address: * emotional reactions to the disclosure of the result * perceptions and representations of the disease and its treatment * the impact on the parent-child relationship * the lived experience of neonatal screening and the perception of the support provided

False-negative screening group

Eligibility Criteria

Age18 Years+
Sexall
Healthy VolunteersYes
Age GroupsAdult (18-64), Older Adult (65+)
Sampling MethodNon-Probability Sample
Study Population

The study participants are parents of children born in the Grand Est or Nouvelle-Aquitaine regions who received a positive or false-negative result from the neonatal screening for SMA during DEPISMA study. They must be adults who are proficient in French and have had at least four months to process the screening results.

You may qualify if:

  • Be the parent of a child included in the DEPISMA study, born in the Grand Est or Nouvelle-Aquitaine region;
  • Have received a positive or false-negative result from the neonatal SMA screening;
  • Be proficient in French in order to participate in a focus group or an individual interview, and to complete the self-administered questionnaires;
  • Have been informed of the NNS result for at least 4 months, to allow sufficient time for a subjective reflection

You may not qualify if:

  • Parent who is not sufficiently proficient in French to participate in focus groups or complete questionnaires
  • Death of the child who was screened

Contact the study team to confirm eligibility.

Sponsors & Collaborators

MeSH Terms

Conditions

Muscular Atrophy, SpinalSpinal Muscular Atrophies of Childhood

Interventions

Interviews as Topic

Condition Hierarchy (Ancestors)

Spinal Cord DiseasesCentral Nervous System DiseasesNervous System DiseasesMotor Neuron DiseaseNeurodegenerative DiseasesNeuromuscular DiseasesHeredodegenerative Disorders, Nervous SystemGenetic Diseases, InbornCongenital, Hereditary, and Neonatal Diseases and Abnormalities

Intervention Hierarchy (Ancestors)

Data CollectionEpidemiologic MethodsInvestigative TechniquesHealth Care Evaluation MechanismsQuality of Health CareHealth Care Quality, Access, and EvaluationPublic HealthEnvironment and Public Health

Study Design

Study Type
observational
Observational Model
CASE ONLY
Time Perspective
PROSPECTIVE
Sponsor Type
OTHER
Responsible Party
SPONSOR

Study Record Dates

First Submitted

September 23, 2025

First Posted

October 6, 2025

Study Start

October 20, 2025

Primary Completion (Estimated)

October 20, 2026

Study Completion (Estimated)

October 20, 2026

Last Updated

October 6, 2025

Record last verified: 2025-10

Data Sharing

IPD Sharing
Will not share